by Brad Warner

I am stunned and amazed by the response to that last post. It proves once again that I have no idea when I’m being controversial and when I’m not. I’ve put posts up here previously that I was certain would set off riots with blood flowing freely through the streets and no one seemed even to have noticed. Then something like my thing about Big Mind™ — which I felt was a pretty minor rant, standard issue for me and a tad boring — doesn’t just get over 140 responses here, but sets off a long, long thread at something called the Buddhist Community E-Sangha (don’t ask me, I never heard of it before someone sent me the link). Maybe it’s cold out in most of the country this time of year and people don’t have much else to do but sit and type on their computers.

I looked at most of the comments. Some were pretty impressive. The one video link someone posted of Ken Wilber wired up to what looks like an Etch-a-Sketch with blinking Christmas tree lights Scotch-taped to it to prove he can go into the most macho deep Samadhi the world has ever known is classic, by the way. Honestly, I cannot even comprehend why anyone would fall for something like that.

The comments about the sixth and seventh precepts deserve a little discussion, though. These are the precepts telling us not to criticize others (or “other Buddhists” as it is sometimes given) or to be proud of ourselves and slander others. One of the great problems I see in Buddhism today is the way these precepts can be twisted to give just about anything deflector shields worthy of a Klingon Bird of Prey against all criticism by anyone involved in Buddhism merely by stating that what one is doing is a form of Buddhist practice. The very worst example of this was in 1995 after the “Buddhist Master” Shoko Asahara used poison gas on the Tokyo subways. My friend Taijun, a Japanese Buddhist nun, paid close attention to the TV, newspaper and magazine coverage of that event in Japan. Though a huge number of Buddhist monks and nuns were interviewed about Asahara, and though all of them condemned the attack, not one of the monks or nuns Taijun saw or read about said that what Asahara taught was not Buddhism. It’s as if they couldn’t bring themselves to cross that line.

Since the Sixties, words like Enlightenment, Awakening, Satori, Kensho and all the rest have entered into our language and popular culture. Lots of people think they want these experiences, but have no idea just what they really are. As long as the deep confusion about these words remains, it’s easy for unscrupulous people to define anything they please as Enlightenment. In the Sixties and Seventies lots of folks in the West thought that the brain damage caused by the use of various psychoactive chemicals was Enlightenment. A few years ago a couple of pinhead burn-outs tried to revive that idea with a popular book and, amazingly, found a large number of supposed “Buddhists” who either supported or were unwilling to criticize their position. Now we have organizations trying to promote the idea that Enlightenment is something that can be had instantly through some special technique that — Surprise! Surprise! —they just happen to hold the patent on.

One of the posters at Suicide Girls pointed out that the purported Buddhist Master I’d criticized there recently was the head of a large and highly respected Buddhist organization. I had actually deliberately left that detail out because, to me, that makes it all the more troubling. So long as no one from that group points out that what this man is selling is clearly unrelated in any way to Buddhism, the rest of us have to assume the organization as a whole supports and agrees with it. And that is a sad state of affairs.

It is very important for those who practice and teach Buddhism to be willing to speak out when some popular trend claiming to be Buddhist is clearly not. That doesn’t always mean shouting from a soapbox. But maintaining noble silence may not be the only alternative. As Buddhism becomes more fashionable and establishes itself as a mainstream philosophy the tendency for all manner of charlatans to latch on to the air of sanctity available to anything that labels itself “Buddhist” will only increase. If we don’t criticize these things because we fear we may violate the precepts we’re doing a terrible disservice to people who want to know what real Buddhism actually is.

287 Responses

and actually, when you say ‘a lot of time’. well, i’ve probably sent about ten emails in total and i’ve asked mike luetchford a few questions in person so i wouldnt say that i was obsessed with it exactly.

you’re right gniz but at the same time, my experience of zazen and my experience of learning from people i trust has all concluded that the point (i think point is probably better than goal) of zazen is just the act of zazen itself. what i know is that if you try and think of zazen as a means rather than an end in itself then you will end up dissappointed. the experience of what it’s like to just be able to sit and genuinely relax just, as you would say, pay attention. that experience is good enough for me. i’m not interested in enlightenment or kensho or whatever experiences and all that mystical stuff. i just like to sit for the sake of it.

the reason why i said ‘just do it’ is because it seems that a whole lot of people on this site have never sat zazen but still profess to be able talk about it cohenrently (obviously not you anon. – the one who’s been sitting for years)

Ummm, btw, there are more than two or three people talking here, sometimes people hop on and off the internet, etc. So what looks like constant posting to you is really just the sum total of a bunch of different people!

Italian semiologist Umberto Eco wrote at one point that PC is Vaseline language. (Or KY language)…

It’s like when you keep running away from the word “nigger” which is only latin for “black”. You keep replacing it by other expressions, but since you haven’t purged it from its negative charge, that charge lingers on, and on…

Anonymous wrote: “in your lineage, the famous Kodo Sawaki”Although Sawaki was the “root teacher” of Nishijima roshi, he isn’t in the lineage.

By the way gniz, we may not truly know what the Buddha actually did under the bodhi tree, nor whether there was one, but the lenght, constancy and consistency of the tradition gives us a fair indication that this might have actually been the case.

Considering some of the posts here, about “true buddhism”, I have thought of forwarding this. Since it comes from a source altogether different, it might reveal itself to be some food for thought. (Sorry, I had to retranslate it from Italian)

“Mind spends most of its time lost in fantasies and illusions, reliving pleasant or unpleasant experiences and anticipating the future with enthusiasm or fear. While we’re lost in those desires and loathings, we are ignorant of what is happening right now, of what we’re doing right now. And yet, it is sure that this moment, now, is for us the most important. We cannot live in the past: it is gone. Nor can we live in the future: it is forever beyond our reach. We can only live in the present moment. If we are unaware of what we’re doing right now, we are condemned to repeat the mistakes of the past and never succeed into reaching our dreams for the future. But if we succeed into developing the capacity to be aware of the present moment, we can use the past as a guide for putting in order our actions to be, so that we will succeed into our goals”

(S. N. Goenka)

Now don’t get me wrong. We ought not have goals in our practice of Buddhism, but our everyday life does need them, I feel.